ISP DISCUSSION PAPER SERIES
AP Photo
October 2009
"Targeting Nuclear Programs in War and Peace"
Discussion Paper
By Matthew Fuhrmann, Affiliate, Project on Managing the Atom and Sarah Kreps, Former Research Fellow, International Security Program, 2007-2008
When do states attack or consider attacking nuclear infrastructure in nonnuclear weapons states? Despite the importance of this question, relatively few scholarly articles have attempted to identify the factors that lead a state to attack another state's nuclear facilities. This paper conducts the first large-n analysis on when states use force as a way to control proliferation.
This paper challenges existing arguments that states are deterred from attacking nuclear programs by the prospect of a military retaliation from the proliferating state or concerns about international condemnation. Instead, it finds that states are more likely to attack nuclear programs when they believe that the proliferating state might use nuclear weapons or engage in other offensive behavior. States are willing to accept substantial costs in attacking if they believe that a particular country's acquisition of nuclear weapons poses a significant threat to their security.
AP Photo
July 2009
"U.S. Aid to Pakistan—U.S. Taxpayers Have Funded Pakistani Corruption"
Discussion Paper
By Azeem Ibrahim, Research Fellow, International Security Program
The United States must not provide Pakistani institutions with incentives to act counter to U.S. foreign policy objectives in the future. It has done so in the past. But until the spring of 2009, no comprehensive overview of the full funding to Pakistan was possible as the figures were kept secret. Those figures, as well as a full analysis of what is known about how they were spent, can now be evaluated. The available information paints a picture of a systemic lack of supervision in the provision of aid to Pakistan, often lax U.S. oversight, and the incentivization of U.S. taxpayer–funded corruption in the Pakistani military and security services. The author believes that this is the first attempt to present an overview of U.S. aid to Pakistan since 2001, evaluate it, and present recommendations on how to ensure that mistakes are not repeated and lessons are learned.
October 31, 2008
"Does Costly Signaling Matter? Preliminary Evidence from a Field Experiment"
Discussion Paper
By Philip Potter, Former Research Fellow, International Security Program, 2006-2008 and Julia Gray
This paper presents a preliminary experiment designed to determine whether costly signaling plays a role in political interactions. Drawing on the expansive signaling literature in international relations and elsewhere, we propose that the quality of solicitation materials matters because voters respond to costly signals from candidates as a shortcut for determining both a candidate’s investment in their own campaign and the degree of commitment from other voters to that candidate’s cause.
March 2007
"A New Energy Paradigm: Ensuring Nuclear Fuel Supply and Nonproliferation through International Collaboration with Insurance and Financial Markets"
Discussion Paper
By Debra K. Decker, Associate, International Security Program/Project on Managing the Atom and Erwann O. Michel-Kerjan
"Seeking ways to dissuade more states from contemplating launching their own uranium enrichment programs...the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) is considering different mechanisms to assure these states that they can obtain fuel supplies from the market without political interference."
January 2007
"Leadership Experience and American Foreign Policy Crises"
Discussion Paper
By Philip Potter, Former Research Fellow, International Security Program, 2006-2008
This paper demonstrates that the probability of an international crisis involving the United States declines significantly as a presidential administration gains experience in office.
November 2006
"The Inadvertent Effects of Democracy on Terrorist Group Emergence"
Discussion Paper
By Erica Chenoweth, Associate, International Security Program
Why are terrorist groups prevalent in democracies?
July 2006
"Religion, Civil War, and International Order"
Discussion Paper
By Monica Duffy Toft, Associate Professor of Public Policy
This article addresses the question of why religion becomes a central issue in some civil wars whereas in others—even many of those whose primary combatants identify strongly with a particular religion—it has not.
June 2002
"Cyber Attacks: Protecting America's Security Against Digital Threats"
Discussion Paper
"...America remains highly vulnerable to another form of attack: a 'cyber attack' against the computer networks that are critical to our national and economic security. Attackers might target banking and financial institutions, voice communication systems, electrical infrastructures, water resources, or oil and gas infrastructures. The growing complexity and interconnectedness of these systems renders them increasingly vulnerable to attack. While a physical attack is likely to be carried out only by terrorists or hostile foreign nation-states, cyber attacks may be carried out by a wide array of adversaries, from teenage hackers and protest groups to organized crime syndicates, terrorists, and foreign nation-states. As a result, the problem is of enormous breadth and complexity. It requires that both our protective and reactive measures deal with each specific scenario, and not just the threat of an attack by terrorists."
March 1998
"Why the United States Should Spread Democracy"
Discussion Paper
By Sean M. Lynn-Jones, Editor, International Security; Series Editor, BCSIA Studies in International Security
After the Cold War ended, promoting the international spread of democracy seemed poised to replace containment as the guiding principle of U.S. foreign policy. Scholars, policymakers, and commentators embraced the idea that democratization could become America''s next mission. In recent years, however, critics have argued that spreading democracy may be unwise or even harmful. This paper addresses this debate.
